ARCHIVED -  Telecom Costs Order CRTC 99-3

Telecom Costs Order

Ottawa, 10 March 1999

Telecom Costs Order CRTC 99-3

In re: Recovery of Local Competition Start-Up and Local Number Portability (LNP) Costs - Telecom Public Notice CRTC 98-10

File No.: 8622-S1-03/98

Application for costs by the Alberta Council on Aging, the Consumers' Association of Canada, la Fédération nationale des associations de consommateurs du Québec and the National Anti-Poverty Organization (ACA et al.).

BACKGROUND

1.By letter dated 30 November 1998, ACA et al. applied for their costs of participating in this proceeding. ACA et al. submitted that they have satisfied the criteria for an award of costs set out in section 44 of the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure (the Rules).

2.Comments were received from AT&T Canada Long Distance Services Company (AT&T Canada LDS), Call-Net Enterprises Inc. (Call-Net), on behalf of Sprint Canada Inc. and Call-Net Communications Inc., GT Group Telecom Networks Inc. (GT Group Telecom), Microcell Telecommunications (Microcell) and Stentor Resource Centre Inc. (Stentor), on behalf of BC TEL, Bell Canada (Bell), Island Telecom Inc. (Island Tel), Maritime Tel & Tel Limited (MT&T), MTS Communications Inc. (MTS), NBTel Inc. (NBTel), NewTel Communications Inc. (NewTel), TELUS Communications Inc.(TCI) and TELUS Communications (Edmonton) Inc.

POSITIONS OF PARTIES

3.None of the parties who filed comments objected to an award of costs for ACA et al.

4.The parties disagreed, however, with respect to the question of the appropriate respondents for costs and with respect to the allocation of costs among respondents.

5.Stentor submitted that any costs awarded should be apportioned equally among all parties who participated actively in the proceeding and who are existing and potential competitive providers of local service.

6.Microcell and GT Group Telecom argued that Stentor should be named as the sole or predominant respondent for costs, since the incumbent local exchange carriers (ILECs) will be the sole or primary beneficiaries of the Commission's determinations in this proceeding, which Microcell compared to a revenue requirement proceeding or an exogenous adjustment proceeding.

7.AT&T Canada LDS submitted that the Stentor companies have the greatest stake in the outcome of this proceeding, and therefore should bear the majority of the costs awarded, with the remaining amount apportioned among other participants as determined by the Commission. For similar reasons, Call-Net proposed that the Stentor members be apportioned 86% of the costs awarded, with the other participants sharing equally in the remaining 15%.

8.In reply, Stentor argued, among other things, that consistent with the evolution of the marketplace and the Commission's prior determinations with respect to the status of competitors as co-carriers in the local market, any costs awarded in this proceeding should be apportioned equally among all telecommunications service providers that participated in the proceeding.

COMMISSION DETERMINATION

9.The Commission considers that ACA et al. have satisfied the criteria for an award of costs set out in the Rules.

10.With respect to the question of the appropriate respondents for costs in this proceeding, the Commission notes that in Telecom Costs Order CRTC 97-14, 23 June 1997, (Costs Order 97-14), the Commission acknowledged that both existing and potential competitive providers of local service had a significant interest in the outcome of the proceeding initiated by Implementation of Regulatory Framework -Local Number Portability and Related Issues, Telecom Public Notices CRTC 95-37 and 95-48. Accordingly, the Commission determined that these parties should be made respondents for costs in that proceeding.

11.Consistent with its determinations in Costs Order 97-14, the Commission considers that existing and potential competitive providers of local service have a significant interest in the outcome of this proceeding. To the extent that these parties participated actively in this proceeding, the Commission considers that they should be made respondents to ACA et al.'s costs award.

12.With respect to the appropriate allocation of costs among the respondents, the Commission continues to be of the view expressed in Costs Order 97-14 that the ILECs will, for the foreseeable future, serve the overwhelming majority of customers who will benefit from local number portability. The Commission further notes that the purpose of this proceeding was primarily to identify the local competition start-up and LNP costs incurred by the ILECs and the extent to which and the means by which these costs should be recovered.

13.In the circumstances, the Commission considers that the ILECs should be allocated an 86% share of the costs awarded to ACA et al., with the remaining amount apportioned equally among the other respondents.

DIRECTION AS TO COSTS

14.The application of ACA et al. for an award of costs in respect of this proceeding is approved.

15.Consistent with the reasons set out above, the Commission directs that costs awarded to ACA et al. be paid by the following respondents, in the proportions indicated:

Bell 40%
BC TEL 13%
TCI 13%
Island Tel 4%
MTS 4%
MT&T 4%
NBTel 4%
NewTel 4%
AT&T Canada LDS 2%
Call-Net 2%
Rogers Cantel Inc. 2%
Clearnet Communications Inc. 2%
GT Group Telecom 2%
Microcell 2%
MetroNet Communications 2%
Group Inc.

100%

16.Costs awarded herein shall be subject to taxation in accordance with the Rules.

17.Costs awarded herein shall be taxed by Margot Patterson.

18.ACA et al. shall, within 30 days of the issue of this Order, submit a bill of costs and an affidavit of disbursements directly to the Taxing Officer, serving a copy on each respondent.

19.The respondents may, within two weeks of receipt of those documents, file comments directly with the Taxing Officer with respect to the costs claimed, serving a copy on ACA et al.

20.ACA et al. may, within two weeks of receipt of any comments by the respondents, file a reply to the respondents' comments, serving a copy on each of the respondents in question.

21.All documents to be filed or served by a specific date must actually be received, and not merely sent, by that date.

Secretary General

This document is available in alternative format upon request.